Hey greeny, that bastion of rightwing reporting (Reuters) has something for you:

www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/16/us-climate-slowdown-idUSBRE93F0AJ20130416

Are you a denier as well?  I thought you guys were all about science?  I guess not when the science does not conform to your way of thinking.

Enviro wackos have a very bad habit of being very wrong with their predictions (imagine that):

Behold the coming apocalypse as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:

1. "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."  — Harvard biologist George Wald
2. "We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation." — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner
3. "Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction." — New York Times editorial
4. "Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years." — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich
5. "Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s." — Paul Ehrlich
6. "It is already too late to avoid mass starvation," — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day
7. "Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine." — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter
8. "In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half." — Life magazine
9. "At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable." — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
10. "Air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone." — Paul Ehrlich
11. "By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won't be any more crude oil. You'll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill 'er up, buddy,' and he'll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn't any.'" — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
12. "[One] theory assumes that the earth's cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun's heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born." — Newsweek magazine
13. "The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age." — Kenneth Watt

Quotes from "Earth Day, Then and Now," by Ronald Bailey, Reason.com. May 1, 2000.

www.freedomworks.org/blog/joncgabriel/the-13-worst-predictions-made-on-earth-day-1970

Oh, and it's also Lenin's birthday.  But don't worry, the enviro wackos will tell you that is just a coincidence.

The real deniers dont want to admit that we have done bad things to the planet.

Baker, Im done banging my head against the wall with you.  I am up against the most powerful entities in the world trying to convince us all that we are having no impact on the climate.  How can little ole me possibly fight against that?  The truth is simply not powerful enough.

But for the record 96% of scientists still agree that man made climate change is indeed very real.  You can scream all you want that thats not true, but that isnt going to make it so. 

So from now on while I dont answer your DENIER comments and so called "facts" dont take it as though I am agreeing with you, or that I cant argue with you.  I am just tired of wasting my time on you.  This isnt to say I wont pop in once in a while.  I dont want to leave my compadre's completely alone while you spread your corporate propaganda...

No warming or two decades. All the computer models have been and continue to be wrong.

And again, man could be causing warming. But as I have said, if so, the game is up, because the developing world ain't gonna stop developing. And the the only "solution" is for humanity to stop development. Ain't gonna happen.

Oh, and at the moment, green tech is a ******* joke. Absent some literally earth shattering advancement, that will not change in our lifetime.

So, the choice has been made for us. But you lunatics can't accept this. So like idiots, you keep throwing trillions away. Because, you know, that money couldn't be put to better use.

Like starting another war.

or bailing out banks who put themselves in the position they were in.  Oh, and hows that working for ya?  banks still arent lending money despite the recent dow jones record breaking high.  Good thing your best friends corporate America is keeping up their end of the bargain eh?!?!?

I'm sure there are plenty of trillions being used to shelter the super-wealthy when earth ends. maybe 50,00 of them in spaceships or some such attempt to sustain human life.  maybe they will find another hospitable planet.  and be the locusts of that world, too.

JClark...please comment on this: The biosphere has spent billions of years capturing carbon from the atmosphere. We are releasing that carbon in 200+ years. Are you suggesting that we can release it exponentially faster than it was captured without ill effect?  Please don't comment on anything else....this just this one FACT.

I don't know.

But again, from my post above:

"And again, man could be causing warming. But as I have said, if so, the game is up, because the developing world ain't gonna stop developing. And the the only "solution" is for humanity to stop development. Ain't gonna happen."

Gentlemen, I am trying to be realistic.  If man is in fact dooming this planet, there is absolutely no solution at this time except for halting human development.  And it will not happen.  It will not halt.

"Should we find a way to develop that may be less harmful to both ourselves and our planet?"


"Nah, **** it. Let's make money!"

yah and lets not invest in greentech because GM and GE and Fixed news says it sucks.  Lets not do any real investigating and just trot out the right wing spin on it.

Saying these things just shows how much of a puppet you really are Baker, because I have worked in greentech (green energy in fact) and the tech has been growing by leaps and bounds.  Wind energy even without subsidies is now nearly on par with oil on a cost per watt comparison, and is way way cheaper then nuclear if you count all costs involved.  Heck even solar energy is getting close, when you count all the tangible benefits that is.